The Pragmatics of Theatrical Dialogue: Analysing Utterance and Meaning on Stage
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6000/2818-3401.2025.03.14Keywords:
Discourse analysis, Discourse & Text, interactional sociolinguistics, linguistics, pragmaticsAbstract
The use of dialect in personal communication extends beyond merely sharing thoughts and information; it plays a vital role in fostering and shaping relationships among individuals. Conversations enable people to express their identities, cultural ties, and preferences for intimacy or distance within their relationships, often without conscious awareness. By employing specific dialects, individuals define their relationships and reaffirm their connection to particular social groups. In contrast, inappropriate terms of address can obstruct effective communication, as these terms mirror the social dynamics of status and distance between speakers, as noted by Akindele (2008: 3-15). The phonetic elements of communication seldom convey neutral implications for interpersonal relationships. Ultimately, self-expression communicates distinct emotions and mental states, which can significantly influence the outcomes of interpersonal interactions. This article aims to outline the features of a written theatrical text that emphasises its oral intent, especially regarding its suitability for stage performance. By highlighting a linguistic understanding that goes beyond the basic levels of words, clauses, phrases, and sentences—knowledge that is essential for effective communication—this study will explore pragmatics from multiple perspectives. This includes analysing speech acts through a focused linguistic approach and interpreting pragmatic significance using frameworks drawn from sociolinguistics, conversation analysis, discourse analysis, and the ethnography of speaking, among others. The research employed qualitative assessment through established linguistic methodologies and utilised descriptive qualitative methods for data analysis. Data collection involved observing and listening to character interactions during performances, as well as examining the corresponding scripts.
References
Al-Assadi, Jawad (2006). Baghdadi Bath, The Arab Theater Training Center (Beirut).
AKINDELE, Dele F. 2008. Sesotho address forms. In Linguistic Online, 2008, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 3-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13092/lo.34.524
Austin. J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford University Press
Brown, Gillian & Yule, George (1993): Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press
Burton, D. (1980) Dialogue and discourse: A sociolinguistic approach to modern drama dialogue and naturally occurring conversation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Chimombo, M. and Roseberry, R. L. (1998). The Power of Discourse: An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/358523
Fishman, Joshua A. (1970). Sociolinguistics: A Brief Introduction. Newbury House Publishers, Rowley, Massachusetts
Frege, G. (1970). Translation from the Philosophical Writing of Gottlob Frege, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Fraser, B. (2005). Whither politeness. In R.T. Lakoff & S.Ide (Eds.), broadening the horizon of linguistic politeness (pp. 65-83). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.139.07fra
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and Conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics Vol. 3 (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
Grice (1978): “Further Notes on Logic and Conversation”. In: Cole, P. (ed). Pragmatics: Syntax and Semantics: Vol.9, Pragmatics, New York: Academic Press, Inc., DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368873_006
Goody, J. 1987.The interface between the oral and the written. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
GOFFMAN, Erving, 1967a, 'On face-work: an analysis of ritual elements in social interaction'. In: Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books, 5-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203788387-2
GOFFMAN, Erving, 1967c, 'Mental symptoms and public order'. In: Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon Books, 137-148 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203788387-6
GOFFMAN, Erving, 1967b, 'The nature of deference and demeanor'. In: Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon Books, 47-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203788387-3
GUMPERZ, John,1986, 1999. 'On interactional sociolinguistic method'. In: C. Roberts & S. Sarangi (eds.) Talk, Work, and Institutional Order. Discourse in Medical, Mediation, and Management Settings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 453-471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110208375.4.453
Grundy, Peter. (2000). Doing pragmatics. Oxford University Press Inc
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976,1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language from a social-semiotic perspective. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Hasan, R. (1989a). The structure of a text, in M.A.K. Halliday and R. Hasan, Language, context, and text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Oxford. Oxford University Press, pp.52-69.
Hasan, R. (1989b). The texture of a text, in M.A.K. Halliday and R. Hasan, Language, context, and text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Oxford. Oxford University Press, pp.70-9
Hymes, D. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Johnston, Barbara. (2008) Discourse Analysis. Blackwell Publishing.
Lo Castro, Virginia. (2012). Pragmatics for language educators. A Sociolinguistics Perspective. Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group. New Yurok and London
Lakoff & S. Ide (Eds.) (2005). In broadening the horizon of linguistic politeness (pp.163-173). Amsterdam: John Benjamin’s. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.139
LEECH Geoffrey, 1983.The Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Naudé, J. A. (2002). An Overview of Recent Developments in Translation Studies with Special Reference to the Implications for Bible Translation. Acta Theological Supplementa, 2, pp. 44-69
Ross, J. (1970): “On Declarative Sentences “In Jacobs, R. and Rosenbaum, P (Eds), Reading in English Transformational Grammar, Waltham, Mass: Ginn and Company
Searle, J. (1975a): “Indirect Speech Acts”. In: Cole, P. and Morgan, Syntax and Semantics: Vol.3, Speech Acts, New York: Academic Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004
Searle, J. (1979):” Expression and Meaning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Silverman, D. (2004). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interpretation. London: Sage.
Strawson, P. (1964). “Intention and Convention”. In: Speech Acts in Philosophical Review, 73, pp.439-460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2183301
Sifianou, M. (1992). Politeness phenomena in England and Greece. New York: Oxford University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198239727.001.0001
Stenham, Polly. (2014). That Face. British English play. FAPAR & FAPAR
Trosborg, A. (1994): Interlanguage Pragmatics: Request, Complaints, and Apologies, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110885286
Paltridge, Brian (2006). Discourse Analysis. Typeset by YHT Ltd, London
Verschueren, Jeff, 1980,1985,90,91, 94a.What People Say They Do with Words. Prolegomena to an Empirical-Conceptual Approach to Linguistic Action. Norwood: Ab
Van Dijk, (1994): “Cognitive Context Models and Discourse”. In: Stamenow, M.
Wardhaugh, Arnold. (1986). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Basil Blackwell
Watts, R.J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Wierzbicka, A. (1990). Cross-cultural pragmatics and different values. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 43-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.13.1.03wie
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
